Couldn't agree more. Where was EJ today? I only watched the post-race coverage as I was waiting to find out what happend with Vettel, but EJ wasnt there.

Today's BBC highlights felt like if they weren't contracted to produce the show, they wouldn't have bothered sending anyone to Germany. No Jake, no EJ. At least we didn't have to put up with another attempt at a live grid walk by Coulthard.

Spotted Gary Anderson on the Sky coverage as Ted was going to the FIA noticeboard. Ted said something like 'oh, hello' to Gary who completely blanked him (which seemed to throw Ted for a moment or two), wandered off into the background and then just looked like he was milling around as Ted passed him moments later. I know he was waiting for the official decision on Vettel, but he looked seriously bored.

they wold have been all there as there audio is pick'd up by other broadcasters and as ppl have said ej seems to only do live events may be that was a cost cuting that slip'd under the radar

I get Georgia Thomson's support of Ant + F1 show, and Natalie Pinkham's pit lane role, both good and improving but .......

Rachel Brookes was impressive, professional, sensible questions and didn't play the 'I'm eye candy/you men are so awesome role' ...... Never seen/heard her before so expected some 'pratishness' as a stand in but no!

I like this half distance report thing that SKY are doing. I remember the BBC doing it at spa last year with EJ slating everyone left right and center.

I don't know, Sky's thing seems to be a series of inane PR interviews strung together with very little input from the pundits.

With EJ, if a team does badly he says so, if they do well he generally praises them. Sky seem complimentary about everyone, even when talking to and about Marussia who have done a pretty terrible job thus far.

Just as an aside, why do people write Sky as SKY? As far as I know it isn't stylized like that in any on screen graphic or in any advertising. In fact glancing at the screen now, it's actually all in lower case!

I like this half distance report thing that SKY are doing. I remember the BBC doing it at spa last year with EJ slating everyone left right and center.

I don't know, Sky's thing seems to be a series of inane PR interviews strung together with very little input from the pundits.

With EJ, if a team does badly he says so, if they do well he generally praises them. Sky seem complimentary about everyone, even when talking to and about Marussia who have done a pretty terrible job thus far.

Just as an aside, why do people write Sky as SKY? As far as I know it isn't stylized like that in any on screen graphic or in any advertising. In fact glancing at the screen now, it's actually all in lower case!

I do it just to differentiate between SKY the TV channel and sky as in the blue sky.

I like this half distance report thing that SKY are doing. I remember the BBC doing it at spa last year with EJ slating everyone left right and center.

I don't know, Sky's thing seems to be a series of inane PR interviews strung together with very little input from the pundits.

With EJ, if a team does badly he says so, if they do well he generally praises them. Sky seem complimentary about everyone, even when talking to and about Marussia who have done a pretty terrible job thus far.

Just as an aside, why do people write Sky as SKY? As far as I know it isn't stylized like that in any on screen graphic or in any advertising. In fact glancing at the screen now, it's actually all in lower case!

I do it just to differentiate between SKY the TV channel and sky as in the blue sky.

I can think of very few scenarios where that confusion would happen When would the blue sky ever do an interview with Christian Horner?

I like this half distance report thing that SKY are doing. I remember the BBC doing it at spa last year with EJ slating everyone left right and center.

I don't know, Sky's thing seems to be a series of inane PR interviews strung together with very little input from the pundits.

With EJ, if a team does badly he says so, if they do well he generally praises them. Sky seem complimentary about everyone, even when talking to and about Marussia who have done a pretty terrible job thus far.

Just as an aside, why do people write Sky as SKY? As far as I know it isn't stylized like that in any on screen graphic or in any advertising. In fact glancing at the screen now, it's actually all in lower case!

Yh SKY are soft on the teams. Probably because it's their first year on the job and they don't want to gherkin too many people off. They're the new kids and are still finding their feet a little.

So we know Jake's jumped ship, many expect DC will leave too what's left for the BBC?

I can't see Lee McKenzie as a permanent presenter and while Gary Anderson's technical knowledge is first rate, he doesn't have the presenting style for the pitlane reports as Ted Kravitz does which works better. I can potentially see James Allen taking on the presenting role, but that would make the coverage more stale for some (James isn't the type that would go camping in Silverstone or air walking and look like it's fun).

I hope they make some annoucements soon.

_________________"We can not drive slower, just to make the races more exciting." Alain Prost

It wasn't so well oiled this year though. In fact it was downright fairy cakes when they weren't live. 2011 was the 'golden year' for the BBC coverage - it was faultless. I suspect we'll see something similar in 2013 with Sky, especially if they make tweaks to the presenting lineup (i.e dropping Simon)

Not really. For their first year in the sport. They were very good. They listened to fan feedback and changed parts of their coverage. Now all they need to do is drop Simon for Georgie and they'd be set.

It wasn't so well oiled this year though. In fact it was downright fairy cakes when they weren't live. 2011 was the 'golden year' for the BBC coverage - it was faultless. I suspect we'll see something similar in 2013 with Sky, especially if they make tweaks to the presenting lineup (i.e dropping Simon)

Here here. Perfect commentary, love-it-or-hate-it EJ, a likeable and knowledgable main host, Kravitz being the best pit lane reporter ever (and starting his from the pitlane blog which I've always loved) but what I loved most was the way they gelled with the F1 circus. It's been the biggest difference between BBC and Sky, Sky's interviews always felt a bit forced upon the drivers whereas the BBC's felt like the drivers were happy to do it. I can't imagine Lewis saying "maybe it's cos I'm black" to Sky, Lee had been doing it for years so they were comfortable with each other.

I actually find F1 team members (Drivers, Staff etc) being more relaxed and open with Sky, they have had far more interviews than the BBC has had just in one season alone and the F1 Members go very deep with them emotional in the interviews/coverage. Sky seem to have hit a nice sport in F1 to be able to get so many interviews and the interviews be so open and emotional, while having a professional touch. (Especially impressive for their short time within F1)

With the BBC everything is very "forced" now, as they know they don't have a future, it's put on a strong face and deal with it, it's much more serious and forced than Sky has ever been.

The award shows how much better Sky coverage was than the BBC this season, of course BBC fans won't like that and still slate Sky, but the award is more evidence of how much they have brought to the sport in just a single season.

Sky is seeking a sponsor for its Formula 1 coverage to replace last season's sponsor Santander, following the ending of discussions about an extension of the sponsorship.

_________________We are worse than animals, we hunger for the killWe put our faith in maniacs the triumph of the willWe kill for money, wealth and lust, for this we should be damnedWe are disease upon the world, brotherhood of man

For me its the BBC all the way. I have access to Sky F1 but don't feel it compares in terms of quality to what the BBC offer. Croft is shouty, Brundle's sarcasm grates on me lately, Lazenby is appalling (most agree), Pickham is clueless and is used simply as eye candy, Kravitz is much better as a voice rather than a presenter, and Herbert appears to have taken on an almost Richard Hammond style role in the proceedings. Sky do deliver better HD quality and sound, but its not enough to keep me tuned in. I enjoy some of the legends programs I have to say. The F1 show is pretty miss-able, but at least they try.

The BBC coverage is not perfect. I don't think either channel will reach the high point of 2011 when the perfect team were together. However the BBC get the bigger audience and deliver a much more natural, easy program. Suzi Perry is no Jake Humphrey in terms of gelling together the team, but she is improving and finding her feet rather well. Gary Anderson is worth his weight in gold and I really don't understand why the BBC put up with Ted for so long. Untapped ability I suppose. Coulthard works well with Edwards and offers the same kind of insight Brundle did, but in a much better way. Plus he is a more recent driver and understands the inside of F1 better in the modern age, or at least that is how it comes across to me. So to conclude, I catch the odd Sky race if I have no other plans, but whenever the BBC is broadcasting, I watch as first choice. Hopefully Sky with have the rights taken off them in 2018 and F1 will return to its rightful home on FTA. Lets open the sport up to as many fans as possible rather than hiding it behind a pay wall that most people struggle to pay.

Unfortunately the majority of the f1 show is not about f1, but rather about things like pin hams triathlon or johnny Herbert's soapbox . Mid week report is much better since the people on it actually discuss f1. Teds notebook is not particularly insightful - "look how shiney the Mclaren is, and look there's hamashima from Ferrari"'. As for his technical insights, he spots new pieces on the car but does not know what they do or how they work. May as well call it teds gossip corner. Pinkham is more suited to a role on a kids tv show.

I like the legends shows and wish they had more of them. I also like the classic races and wish they showed them more often, not just the week leading up to a Grand Prix.

Ted's notebook used to be essential viewing, but has been dumbed-down somewhat. The lowpoint was Ted going through the Hungaroring carpark looking at all the F1 drivers' hire cars, and finding out he doesn't know what 'biturbo' means.

How anyone can enjoy DC's commentary is beyond me, for someone who really just stopped racing a few years back his insights are amazingly inaccurate which for a commentator is not what I'm looking for. Regularly he is found wanting when analysing a situation, in qualifying he is often crediting performance without even taking in to account obvious factors like which tyre the time was set on.

Although both channels have a very similar way if presenting f1, they're both different enough with different crew to split any vote down the middle. It's almost like Elvis or Beatles from pulp fiction, you can like them both but have to have 1 you like better.

_________________There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.

Gary Anderson's monotone drone puts me to sleep only for me to be woken up moments later by Ben Edwards's LOUD SHOUTING AT ANY SMALL THING THAT HAS HAPPENED ON TRACK!

The thing with Gary is you know what he is saying is perhaps more interesting than his accent. For the more passionate fans amongst us who enjoy the technical details of the sport being explained, he is a very valuable member of the team. Ted is very good on Sky for finding out gossip and delivering it to the viewer, but his technical knowledge is lacking and that shows.

Sky don't do a bad job on the whole, but they have priced themselves out of ever being the primary channel for watching F1. All the fancy gimmicks and exclusivity with live races is the only thing they give of any quality that the BBC can't match. For Sky it doesn't matter if only 600k people are watching their show. Its part of their Sports package and is just another marketing tool as far as they are concerned. Bernie said when the deal was announced that it didn't matter if viewers tuned in for 2 minutes or 2 hours, as long as they tuned in. He's since hinted viewers are important after all and suggested Sky give the channel away free of charge with new subscribers, or produce boxes exclusively for F1. I would imagine Sky laughed in his face to be quite honest. This does make you wonder how important FTA coverage is for the sports popularity long term in the UK though. Figures took a steady rise between 2009 and 2011 and reached their highest for 30 years. Contrast that now with a drop of 3m on average and it suggests we have a steady decline in only a 12 month period.

Sky are no longer allowing 'new' HD customers the chance to receive the channel and now it costs £21.50 more a month to receive it, compared to 2012. With a price increase of 10% expected for September 1st this year, it'll soon by more expensive again. Its not exactly an inviting prospect for F1 fans and its no wonder only a quarter of the sports UK audience are tuning in on Sky F1. That must seem an awful waste when you consider how much money has been pumped into the channel. It might be why more effort is not made to fill the channel during the week or show more classic races. One of Brundle's reasons for moving to Sky (apart from the pay increase) was to do more segments and technical analysis. This doesn't appear to have been achieved and the quality of segments on Sky are not exactly mind blowing. Watching Coulthard driving Jim Clark's Lotus the other week and the quality of the editing really proves how well the BBC are at this sort of thing. I think this why the BBC is still hugely popular amongst fans. They may lack the track time and live element, but do an immense job with what they have at their disposal.

For me its the BBC all the way. I have access to Sky F1 but don't feel it compares in terms of quality to what the BBC offer. Croft is shouty, Brundle's sarcasm grates on me lately, Lazenby is appalling (most agree), Pickham is clueless and is used simply as eye candy, Kravitz is much better as a voice rather than a presenter, and Herbert appears to have taken on an almost Richard Hammond style role in the proceedings. Sky do deliver better HD quality and sound, but its not enough to keep me tuned in. I enjoy some of the legends programs I have to say. The F1 show is pretty miss-able, but at least they try.

The BBC coverage is not perfect. I don't think either channel will reach the high point of 2011 when the perfect team were together. However the BBC get the bigger audience and deliver a much more natural, easy program. Suzi Perry is no Jake Humphrey in terms of gelling together the team, but she is improving and finding her feet rather well. Gary Anderson is worth his weight in gold and I really don't understand why the BBC put up with Ted for so long. Untapped ability I suppose. Coulthard works well with Edwards and offers the same kind of insight Brundle did, but in a much better way. Plus he is a more recent driver and understands the inside of F1 better in the modern age, or at least that is how it comes across to me. So to conclude, I catch the odd Sky race if I have no other plans, but whenever the BBC is broadcasting, I watch as first choice. Hopefully Sky with have the rights taken off them in 2018 and F1 will return to its rightful home on FTA. Lets open the sport up to as many fans as possible rather than hiding it behind a pay wall that most people struggle to pay.

Seldom do i see a post that i disagree with on damn near every point !I like Crofty's enthusiam,Brundle's humour makes the program fun, (like he did alangside DC)OK Lazenby is a bit crap,but Pinkham is far more knowledgeable than Suzi is, (and i like Suzi)Kravitz is brilliant, and gets out there looking for the why's,Johnny is great, and is an F1 winner, therefore his point of view is extremely valid,Jake was the reason i moved top sky, because of how much of an donkey he was, I just could not watch him any more without getting angry,I find anderson and edwards boring and dare i say it , they have a higher opinion of their own qualities than they have right to,DC although i am a fan, is not even in the same league for being able to give insight from the drivers point compared to Brundle, which was clearly shown when they were together, ( i do think they were the best team in recent seasons),

I would love the BBC to get back the coverage, however, i would want most of the sky team to present, but the BBC have made it very clear that is not what they want

I watch the Sky only races on Sky (obviously) but if a race is on the BBC that's what I watch it on. I far prefer the Beeb's more measured approach. Sky have done with F1 what they do with all their sports and that's chuck big bucks at it and go for presentation over content. Their football coverage is painful to watch sometimes.

I like Brundle as a commentator but Johnny and Damon add nothing to the analysis IMO, Damon in particular has never come across well on TV and Johnny seems to be an afterthought most of the time.

On the Beeb, DC and EJ are in a league of their own, I'm never quite sure if they genuinely DO hate each other but the friction between them sometimes makes the show, and while I agree Gary Anderson isn't prime TV material his knowledge of the technical stuff is way beyond anything Sky can offer. I've been watching F1 religiously since the days of Prost & Senna (& occasionally since the days of Stewart, Fittipaldi & Villeneuve) and there's never been anyone with such a sound technical insight on the UK TV coverage.They do need someone better than DC on the gridwalk though, he's far too polite.

I watch the Sky only races on Sky (obviously) but if a race is on the BBC that's what I watch it on. I far prefer the Beeb's more measured approach. Sky have done with F1 what they do with all their sports and that's chuck big bucks at it and go for presentation over content. Their football coverage is painful to watch sometimes.

I like Brundle as a commentator but Johnny and Damon add nothing to the analysis IMO, Damon in particular has never come across well on TV and Johnny seems to be an afterthought most of the time.

On the Beeb, DC and EJ are in a league of their own, I'm never quite sure if they genuinely DO hate each other but the friction between them sometimes makes the show, and while I agree Gary Anderson isn't prime TV material his knowledge of the technical stuff is way beyond anything Sky can offer. I've been watching F1 religiously since the days of Prost & Senna (& occasionally since the days of Stewart, Fittipaldi & Villeneuve) and there's never been anyone with such a sound technical insight on the UK TV coverage.They do need someone better than DC on the gridwalk though, he's far too polite.

DC isn't too polite, just panicked and out his depth.

I used to like Johnny Herbert as a driver and I wasn't sure what to expect when he joined sky. At first they almost seemed to be trying to turn him into the EJ buffoon. But he's relaxed and measured. Just watch his Red Bull Soap Box run with Herbert's Lemon or his lap promoting The Dark Knight Rises with Lotus. Damon Hill still feels a little too uncomfortable, but is growing on me in the same way Coulthard did 2009-11.

As much as I admire Ben Edwards, his style isn't for F1. Crofty can get overexcited and shout at times, but he is closer to Murray Walker than a tramp who's 'heard the word of the lord' in his excitement. Coulthard sounds more nervous without Brundle alongside him, yet Brundle has a relationship with Crofty somewhere behind DC, but maybe a bit ahead of Walker.

Take Jake 'The Bully' Humphrey out of the equation and it feels the dynamics have disappeared. It's like they're treading borderline sex discrimination lawsuits on BBC at times. Lazenby may be irritating to some (he does grow on you though, I've been watching him on Sky for years), but he's probably the only major weak point. I'd say he's still better for the show than Suzi Perry.

While Gary Anderson has a phenomenal knowledge, he does make you feel sleepy, very sleepy. I had several lecturers at University like this. His knowledge is immense, but the delivery makes it hard to retain the knowledge. Ted Kravitz has better delivery, but is largely a gushing fan who loves F1. I like both and actually think Anderson would be better on sky offering in depth analysis to the fans regularly. On the BBC, he's lost on too many of the casual fans.

Sky still wins, but has room for improvement.

_________________"We can not drive slower, just to make the races more exciting." Alain Prost

I'm not going to argue with your post, everyone is entitled to their opinions (mine are more similar to henners88) but you can't compare Suzi to Pinkham. If you want compare Pinkham to her BBC counterpart, that would be Lee. Suzi is doing Lazenby's job for the beeb.

_________________There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.